increased manpower on heavy tanks is a problem
Posts: 337
Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6
I also hope they gonna change unit costs mostly for T-70, P4, SU-85 and all infantry units
Posts: 598
Posts: 480
Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6
it's better to have lower fuel costs on tanks because of higher fuel income? that is just asking for tank spam. i think before the patch players were able to obtain heavy tanks reasonably quick. still whether or not the price change on heavy tanks like is2 and tiger is a good idea, the panther and brummbar price is, bad they are not heavy tanks, despite what relic thinks.
dude, before this patch you were overpaying for your tanks, only P4 seemed viable and Panther (but panther price was totally imbalanced) and soviets had only SU-85 as a viable counter to P4 spam. Remember price for IS-2? 300 Fuel and tank was useless? also 290 Fuel for IS-152 that could be also easily raped
Posts: 598
dude, before this patch you were overpaying for your tanks, only P4 seemed viable and Panther (but panther price was totally imbalanced) and soviets had only SU-85 as a viable counter to P4 spam. Remember price for IS-2? 300 Fuel and tank was useless? also 290 Fuel for IS-152 that could be also easily raped
if being useless at the high price is a problem, then buff the tanks. the is2 received a price reduction + a heavy damage buff. the isu152 can be easily defeated if a tank is able to flank it, but keep in mind that the isu152 act as an anti everything because of it's long range and huge damage, and it's meant to be behind the lines. if the enemy cannot attack the isu152 then the tank will ruin everything the germans have.
Posts: 2742
Fuel is a resource that can be stockpiled throughout the game, and the more fuel units costs, the more territory needs to be held for longer periods of time. If a player is cut off or pushed back, they must rely on the fuel in their reserves to tech up or field heavy tanks, as waiting for it to trickle in can be prohibitively slow. The amount that's in your reserves is a reflection of how much control of the map you've held all game.
Manpower is a resource that is constantly in flux that is principally only held in reserve due to population cap, or through sensible gameplay promoting unit preservation. If a player is pushed back into their base or loses squads, their manpower income remains steady (or reverts to the higher rate of income due to a relaxed pop cap). The more you can float or the more dire you're in need of manpower is a reflection on how much of the map you're actively contesting.
In short: these changes put fielding tanks more in line with total map control and game play throughout a match rather than just simply fuel income.
Posts: 89
Posts: 688
In COH2 you can't limit the enemies fuel like you could in COH1. It's pretty redundant to fight over fuel now since players can just build fuel caches on strat points anyway (plus the opel).
End game has become like American football: two blocks of armour rammed into eachother and then someone drops the ball. Where's the finesse and tactics?
Posts: 88
Before it seemed you had to stay low tier whole gane to afford an IS2/Tiger/... in time that the tank still could have impact
Posts: 598
600 mp and 130 fuel panthers did not improve 1v1s but imbalanced 4v4s! comon relic!
Posts: 215
I dont play large team games specifically because its just specialist unit spam (snipers, mg42s, su85s, etc) en bulk
Posts: 525
Posts: 598
you cant balance off 4v4s for the millionth time. They would have to implement cost scaling based on the number of players in a match: either resources would decrease, or costs increase proportionately if that is your issue.
I dont play large team games specifically because its just specialist unit spam (snipers, mg42s, su85s, etc) en bulk
even in 1v1s it's still imbalanced. i already explain what the tank should be like in 1v1s in my first post. the player has to save fuel at the risk of being overrun to early by tanks. risk and rewards and the current price doesn't allow that. did you read my last sentence from my previous post?
"600 mp and 130 fuel panthers did not improve 1v1s but imbalanced 4v4s! comon relic!"
so it doesn't help you to bring up 1v1s because it doesn't help 1v1s and just worsens 4v4s. get it?
Posts: 299
If your saving for t4 as a competitive build vs. tight builds and good players you need fuel way more then manpower and the the extra manpower you pay is less then what you should be bringing in in a minute. Does this make panthers viable in 1v1 vs. good players with good builds probably not but it puts it more in the right direction I think.
Posts: 409
what is this talk of now you have to have less units if you want to build panther/ brumbar? the difference is 160 manpower, last I checked no unit in the game cost less then 200 and that is just pio's. In comparison the fuel was dropped by 35 and 30 giving you about a minute faster tank, fuel wise (assuming you have at least half the map that is). Sure is it going to take you slightly longer to save up the manpower, yes.
If your saving for t4 as a competitive build vs. tight builds and good players you need fuel way more then manpower and the the extra manpower you pay is less then what you should be bringing in in a minute. Does this make panthers viable in 1v1 vs. good players with good builds probably not but it puts it more in the right direction I think.
You're forgetting about reinforcement costs for existing infantry. Every additional second I have to wait for floating 600 manpower is another second that my wounded squad does not reinforce and just sits at base.
It's not too bad for the first Panther/Brummbar if you're rushing it, but it becomes a huge problem late game since you are never going to be floating 6-700 manpower in a close game.
Livestreams
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.615222.735-2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, trevinehickman
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM